Is there a way to shoot and develop in sepia anymore?

[eharriett]

My girlfriend is about to purchase her first home and it is most likely going to be a 100 year old Victorian style home. She expressed a desire to have the a nice, quality film picture of the house taken in sepia. Is there a way to do that anymore with either a 35mm camera or a 120? And if so, where could I send it to get that developed?

Or is this something that can only happen through digital filtering anymore?

Thanks!

 

[MattKing]

There are many, many ways.
The simplest is to use regular black and white film, and then print it in a darkroom on regular black and white photographic paper. Then you just tone the print using a sepia toner.
I use either a brown toner or sepia toner on many prints.
For this one I used brown toner

 

[BMbikerider]

Unless you go down the...errrr..... digital route........many cameras now have the facility to take pictures in sepia rather than colour, but they are not the same.

 

[eharriett]

Thank you! I did not realize that was as easy as that. It doesn't show upas a regular option at the labs I frequent. I shall have to ask around and make inquiries.

 

[ArgentixCa]

And the best part of it is that you do not need a darkroom to tone your prints.
If you have them printed commercially - as I read in your options - you can tone them yourself in broad daylight, with a limited amount of material.

You will never be served better than by yourself.

Keep shooting!

 

[spijker]

Just beware that if you want to tone the prints yourself, the photo has to be printed on silver gelatin black & white paper. Most labs scan the black & white negatives first and then print them on color paper. The prints on color paper can not be toned afterwards with a sepia toner. Dead Link Removed does prints on b&w paper that can be sepia toned afterwards.

 

[ArgentixCa]

Quite right Menno!

Apologies for this forgotten -and important- detail.

 

[Pentode]

Another option is to use a chromogenic (C41) B&W film such as XP-2 and print on color paper, adjusting the color balance for sepia tones.

 

[RauschenOderKorn]

And if so, where could I send it to get that developed?

There are quite a few commercial labs which will do this job in accordance with your instructions, including the desired sepia tone. If I am not wrong, Bob Carnie - active member of this forum - runs such a lab. If you search a bit (google is your friend), you should be able to find a few options, maybe even a local one.

 

[Luckless]

May also be a good excuse for you to invest in a large format camera and do contact prints...
- Having the option of camera movements may make the photo project easier, and allow a better aligned image. Worth considering if you have any interest in possibly dealing with large format.


But which ever camera you choose to use, you really have to decide how much you want to do yourself, and what you want to deal with.
- Hybrid processing by way of scanning your film and printing with standard colour inkjet process is possibly the cheapest and easiest method in many cases, but the end result is not well loved by some. (However, so far I've not had anyone tell the difference between my hybrid prints and the handful of analog prints I have had made.)
- Doing everything yourself may not be the cheapest or easiest, but is possibly the most rewarding option.

 

[spijker]

Another option is to use a chromogenic (C41) B&W film such as XP-2 and print on color paper, adjusting the color balance for sepia tones.

Since you seem to be new to film, this would probably be your best (least risk) option. You can easily try out the sepia effect with a small print first before ordering a bigger print. I'd be hesitant to dip a more expensive silver gelatin print into a sepia toner if I'd never done it before. A person with a darkroom usually has enough rejected prints laying around to try out the toner before toning the real print. You won't have that luxury. Sepia toning is not very difficult so if you're willing to take the risk, you could pull it off.

 

[eharriett]

Thanks. I've always been curious about large format, but hesitant to go down that route for costs. The closest I've come is considered getting an old roll pack Polaroid converted to 4x5 holders, but I'm not there yet. Still working on getting a higher percentage of good shots from 120. I figure I'd better start getting more consistently quality results there before going further (also experimenting with 35mm, but that's more of a fun thing).

 

[lantau]

Sometimes I've read about toning the actual film after development. Am I right that this is done only for its archival properties? After all the lovely sepia tone is quite useless on a negative because it's not making a difference when printing the negative on an optical enlarger. Or is there a change in tonality that cannot be had when toning the positive? (However I'm usually lost when people talk about the specific tonality of an image. To me it's black and white, and has certain grain and constrast. The only film were I really say it has a very certain 'look', but not always, is Acros).

 

[Luckless]

Large format doesn't have to be horribly expensive. It isn't pleasant on your wallet if you plan to shoot dozens of frames every week, but it isn't a massive investment if you keep things simple with the plan to take it out a few times a year for special specific shots that benefit from the format: Cheap 4x5 camera, inexpensive lens, 3-6 film holders, a few boxes of film, and a tank to develop them in. Is a $1000+ camera, and a half dozen $1000+ lenses on their own boards, and dozens of film holders loaded and ready to go every weekend a nice thing to have? Sure. But a $200 camera, a $200-300 lens, and under $100 in holders is enough for you to get started with and explore.

Having large format gear means you have a tool in your kit to work with, but it doesn't mean every single photo-outing brings it and its expensive film feeding habit along too. It sits happily on a shelf or in a cupboard while the cheaper habit is fed with smaller format cameras.

Decide what kind of angle of view you like on your lenses, do you tend to reach for a wide, normal, or tight shot, and buy a lens to match. Find a camera that fits your budget. Whether or not you have a decently solid tripod and a good head for it already does impact your investment, but it makes a good excuse to finally get one if you don't have one yet.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Another issue to consider when sepia-toning a print made by someone else is that if they have used a hardening fixer in making the print, it can have a deleterious effect on the toning process. It would depend on which toner you are using to achieve the sepia effect - some one-step toners like Berg Brown will go off with hardened prints and instead of a nice sepia you'll get coppery-pink. If you use a two-step toner (bleach and tone) the bleach step may be negatively impacted by the hardened print. If you are not going to print the print yourself, I would have the lab do the entire process end-to-end for you.

 

[Nodda Duma]

Sometimes I've read about toning the actual film after development. Am I right that this is done only for its archival properties? After all the lovely sepia tone is quite useless on a negative because it's not making a difference when printing the negative on an optical enlarger. Or is there a change in tonality that cannot be had when toning the positive? (However I'm usually lost when people talk about the specific tonality of an image. To me it's black and white, and has certain grain and constrast. The only film were I really say it has a very certain 'look', but not always, is Acros).

Toning tends to add contrast to the negative.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Tor-Einar Jarnbjo]

If you have them printed commercially - as I read in your options - you can tone them yourself in broad daylight, with a limited amount of material.

Sorry, but if you want a decent result, that is simply not correct. You are right that the toning can be done in daylight, but almost without exception, you need to factor in and consider the later toning process when doing the actual print. You usually can't take an otherwise correctly exposed print, tone it and expect the result to be good. Most toning processes do not only change the hue of the print, but will also cause changes in overall density and contrast. If the toning process e.g. increases density and contrast, you will have to print a brighter and flatter image than you would have done, if you were not intending to tone the image.

 

[winger]

If your location is listed correctly, there are some APUGers not too far from you who may be willing and able to collaborate on such a print.